421–430 of 653 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah we get to choose between google and apple. Lucky us...
Would you rather have no choice? I get the sentiment, but it's nice to finally have lawmakers and regulators standing for what's right - for once.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very true, my needs are niche for sure. But I’m more thinking about the near future. AI/LLMs are going to have some general applications that users are going to want, and will become the norm, and I think it’s clear that will shake out soon. Apple is at risk of being left behind because the only people working on that stuff for Apple, work at Apple. Hobbyists and researchers are on Linux/Windows for the most part. So…
> But ML is different and I think they should care. It’s totally this time I promise, just like, one more ~~lane~~ model. I’m sure they do care. I wouldn’t be surprised if they land significant support for on-app processing of models, they’ve already got the chip, dropping in local models is a sensible next step, and if close to zero effort for them. > LLMs are going to have some general applications that users are g…
They've done an okay job of that so far, but their flagship library is diverging pretty far from industry demand. At best, CoreML is a slightly funkier Tensorflow - at worst, it's a single-platform model cemetery. No matter what road they take, they have to keep investing in upstream support if they want Nvidia to feel the heat. Otherwise, it's CUDA vs CoreML which is an unwinnable fight when you're selling to datacenter customers.
I think it's possible for Apple to make everyone happy here by reducing hostilities and dedicating good work where it matters. Generally though, it feels like they're wasting resources trying to compete with Nvidia and retread the Open Source work of 3 different companies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are plenty of ways to differentiate in a competitive market. Good regulations set baselines for fair play, both toward customers and competitors. Whether or not that makes some aspects of those choices more similar isn't really relevant. Or if it is, it's because it makes them similar in good ways. Ways that are pro-customer and pro-competition, but they won't do unless legally required.
I agree that there are plenty of ways competitors could differentiate themselves. But in the current market, I think there are very few competitors, and even fewer ways they currently differentiate themselves. And the most notable recent regulations would eliminate one of the more meaningful differentiations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
EU rules say Apple can't prioritize their own browser. PWAs only work with WebKit due to the iOS security model, and the amount of work necessary to try to support PWAs with third-party browser engines securely was way out of scope for the time frame to support the DMA. Because Apple can't prioritize their own browser, they had to remove PWA support entirely in the EU. Naturally there was a lot of backlash, and so Ap…
> the amount of work necessary to try to support PWAs with third-party browser engines securely was way out of scope for the time frame to support the DMA. Rubbish. The DMA became law in November 1st 2022. A trillion(!)-dollar corporation had approximately a year and a half to work this out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Microsoft simply lacked the network effects MS beat Apple to market by a considerable margin. Windows Mobile substantially predates the iPhone, and it was actually usable. (I had one of their flagship devices.) But MS’s OS concept was incoherent, their UI was laggy, their web browser was unbearably slow despite arguably superior hardware, their form factor was not snazzy. And, unlike Apple, they utterly failed at m…
blackberry didn't seem to care about regular consumers until it was to late, instead relying on corporate customers and relying on integration with enterprise messaging software. windows was well windows 8 and everyone hated it and everything about it. (and pre-windows phone 8 it was to fragmented with to many incompatible versions and little 3rd party support) Palm/HP WebOS was the real mobile OS with the best chanc…
Has trapped so many businesses.
Enterprise customers can afford to pay enough to support good profit margins...
... but there are many more regular consumers, and regular consumer demands tend to produce better solutions than baroque enterprise demands (usually company- or VP-specific).
Apple’s behavior largely makes sense given what a huge share of their profits their racketeering of customer access earns them. If you ever wanted to see regulation pains as the cost of doing business, this is it. But banning epic was just pathetic baby behavior. I hope epic launches the epic game store for iOS and its dogshit but cheaper and the gacha gravy boats all jump ship
Why does Epic get the privilege to force me to buy things through their store?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Microsoft simply lacked the network effects Microsoft execs had their heads buried too deep in their own asses to be able to understand what was needed at the time. They pushed a platform (Windows phone) that lacked interesting features out of the box, lacked cloud services integration to fill the gap left by the lacking base features, and required Windows as a development platform (and, iirc, C# as well?). It didn…
I think there’s more to it than this, and it’s subtle: The iPhone was cool . Seriously, the original iPhone had little going for it technically. No GPS, poor data bandwidth, no apps, and minimal ability to make phone calls. (It took the combined efforts of Apple and AT&T a couple generations before you could reliably place a call.) But it had a touch screen that felt nice, and you could watch videos and play music! T…
Basically an observation that consumers were interested in digital media players, which Apple had some expertise in building (iPods, for younger folks).
And that a usable browser was a killer feature (most of the web not having reactive mobile sites, and no apps, then).
And if you combined all of the above with a cell phone, customers would rather carry 1 device than the 3 it previously took.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the article > “Following conversations with Epic, they have committed to follow the rules, including our DMA policies. As a result, Epic Sweden AB has been permitted to re-sign the developer agreement and accepted into the Apple Developer Program.”
Definitely just Apple trying to save face. Without the threat of fines and lengthy legal proceedings Apple would not have cared about "epic's commitment to follow the rules"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That only makes sense if we assume Apple’s world class legal team didn’t see what every lay person could. Rolling back the decision is not going to get them out of the eyes of the regulators and they must have assumed that going into it. Why give the EU even more ammo against you. My guess is that they saw that all happening but Epic provided them a letter saying they double pinky promised, cross their hearts, will o…
Or maybe Apple is not infallible, they took a shot because they are very arrogant and thought they could get away with it, and it failed miserably because now there is a law which makes their abusive behaviors illegal?